I would think that an array of more normal cameras (say, 16 or so) with a LIDAR scanner would be a better approach. Far more efficient, and the 3D info from the LIDAR should enable you to make good VR imagery.
Typically, venomous creatures are immune to a wide range of toxins.
Kernel bypass plus zero copy are, of course, old-hat. Worked on such stuff at Lightfleet, back when it did this stuff called work. Infiniband and the RDMA Consortium had been working on it for longer yet.
What sort of performance increase can you achieve?
Well, Ethernet latencies tend to run into milliseconds for just the stack. Tens, if not hundreds, of milliseconds for anything real. Infiniband can achieve eight microsecond latencies. SPI can get down to two milliseconds.
So you can certainly achieve the sorts of latency improvements quoted. It's hard work, especially when operating purely in software, but it can actually be done. It's about bloody time, too. This stuff should have been standard in 2005, not 2015! Bloody slowpokes. Back in my day, we had to shovel our own packets! In the snow! Uphill! Both ways!
It is important that transactions not go through any kind of centralized system, but this sort of attack shows that you can't simply make the entire network a virtual centralized system. We need a replacement system that eliminates the need for a single physical or virtual store.
I can only imagine someone saying this after 9/11. "Once America decided that allowing terrorists to kill people was bearable, it was over."
Except that America decided it wasn't acceptable and ended up going to war because of it.
Meanwhile, 10 people die in a school shooting and within a month it'll have been forgotten because the next shooting has come along
Dan Hodges said it best:
In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.
As long as the developer of Crystal puts a tickbox in the preferences to allow you to block "acceptable advertising" then I don't see the issue. I understand that Crystal doesn't have a preferences screen right now, but it shouldn't be that hard to add one.
People who are happy to see adverts as long as they meet some sort of "acceptable" criteria can have it turned off - and people who just never want to see an advert again can turn it on.
Please don't let it be a repeat of Adblock Plus where all the nerdrage drowned out the few voices of reason that merely pointed out that all the anger could be resolved with the unchecking of a single tickbox in the preferences.
That's the only real solution. All of those people who are hassling you now, will be hassling somebody else in the future. I hope that the "popular forum" you mention isn't something that's vital to your life; if it isn't then abandon it. If it is, it's a more interesting question.
If you need to continue to participate in that forum, I would suggest you just be yourself. Say what you believe, and don't get too fussy about it.
I've heard from a lot of women who participate in public fora that this kind of abuse is not just commonplace, it's ubiquitous. You might also think of the 34,000,000 people doxxed last month. It's just a common thing, it's going to happen to everybody sooner or later.
Marco loves drama. He'll say or do something "controversial", a ton of tech sites will run with it, he gets all the attention and then two days late he expresses regret for saying or doing whatever he said or did. A recent example is here, with backpeddle here.
Peace is no different. Drama for two days followed by backpeddle.
The stupid thing is that the whole "issue" he had could have easily been solved with a pre-loaded whitelist of advertisers. He could have even called it "Acceptance Ads".
But then that wouldn't have generated quite as much drama and attention would it?
UK network operators are castigated by the UK Government for not building out mobile coverage in rural areas.
Network Operators respond by pointing out that they don't because of the difficulty in finding locations to provide the required coverage, local planning applications, the availability of power and problems with site access.
UK Government says "amateurs, we can do it better than you" so sets up project to do just that.
Project spectacularly fails to achieve anything and sheepishly admits that the reasons for its failure are due to the difficulty in finding locations to provide the required coverage, local planning applications, the availability of power and problems with site access.
First, they could always use blipverts.
Second, 400+ new shows is somewhere between half to a third of a new show per channel per season, on average. That suggests that if there's too much new material, there are far, far too many channels. In fact, that might be the best solution. Shut down nine in every ten channels. Then you can have exactly the same amount of new material with less channel surfing. People will stay on channel because they'll like the next program as well.
The British did perfectly well on four channels. In fact, they mostly did perfectly well on three channels. America is, of course, bigger. They might need fifteen to cater to all the various needs. You don't need several thousand (including local). All it does is dilute the good stuff with a lot of crap.
I think that NASA's idea is interesting...very challeging, as other have noted, but worth it if it could be done.
I have been toying with the idea for an SF story using comets. Spaceships would wait for a comet to come by, then embed themselves into the tail of the comet, and use some kind of ramjet propulsion to accelerate out of the inner solar system. Obviously comet tails are not dense at all (a less dense vacuum than what can be made on earth) but the ion tail should be manipulatable.
Anyway, in the story, people in their spaceships end up flying out in more-or-less random directions, and hoping to find something interesting in the process.
Google update their logo today, and up on their main site is a movie that shows the old logo being erased, and the new one being drawn. Halariously, the movie didn't start until I clicked on it -- was it a flash movie?
Not true. West Texas doesn't subsidize solar, and there are mammoth solar arrays being installed there. Note that this is the Wall Street Journal, not a particularly liberal paper.
Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.